get_token_price

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries the full burden of behavioral disclosure. It does add the key detail that API key authentication is required, and implies a read-only, time-sensitive operation by saying 'current'. However, it does not mention potential side effects, rate limits, or what happens if the key is invalid, which would strengthen transparency.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise and front-loaded: the first sentence states the core function, and the second sentence adds the essential prerequisite. Every word earns its place, with no redundancy or irrelevant detail.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple tool with one optional parameter and no output schema, the description is nearly sufficient. It explains the API key requirement and the tool's general purpose, while the schema details the default market. It could optionally mention the return format (e.g., price representation) but that is reasonably implied for a price oracle tool.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema description covers the single parameter (market_id) with 100% coverage, including its type and default behavior. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantics beyond what the schema already provides, hence the baseline score of 3.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states a specific verb ('Get') and resource ('current oracle price for collateral token'), distinguishing it from sibling tools, none of which directly fetch token prices. The purpose is unambiguous and self-contained.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description mentions a prerequisite ('Requires any Floe API key') but does not explicitly state when to use this tool versus alternatives or provide exclusions. Usage context is implied by the tool's name and purpose, but no direct comparison to other tools is given.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.